alex_b

We used buggypitstop.co.uk. The service was good but it?s ?15 each way for collection/delivery.

The middle box is your main incoming supply and master circuit breaker, then you have your consumer unit and then you appear to have a mess of junctions to connect everything up. My guess is that whomever added the new consumer unit couldn?t be bothered to replace the whole setup and created that mess instead. I wouldn?t have thought it was dangerous but it?s hardly the most professional installation in the world.

A similar issue on the Maxted, Nutbrook, Adys, CPR rat run. If there?s a scheme to implement that would be a huge help.

MarkT Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Average speed cameras are good in principle but > how would it work on Barry Road with its multiple > crossings? This must be considered in relation to > the planned CPZ in adjoining streets. Even if only a minority of cars were travelling the full length of the road it would slow the overall speed of traffic including for those joining/leaving on the crossing roads. Place a third camera towards the middle and you probably catch most people. There is also a significant deterrent effect from having visible cameras even if they don't catch anyone/everyone.

DulwichSal Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I have written twice to Helen Hayes... no reply as > yet She probably hasn?t received them yet ;)

I?m also unconvinced that raised tables will make things much safer. In my experience they massively increase road noise (especially from large vehicles) and simply lead to hard acceleration and sudden breaking between the obstacles. Unfortunately this seems to be Southwark?s only approach to resolving traffic issues.

jamesmcash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The council is in the process of installing 50 > further charging points across the borough. If you > have a location that you would like to suggest > then do let me know. Are these all going to be at the very high per minute rates as the existing ones? It seems fairly pointless if recharging an electric vehicle is as/more expensive per mile than filling a petrol car.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > By 6 you need a high backed booster. This depends on the height and weight of the child, not their age. Usually the limit for a harness is 25kg although some are lower. Car seats can be used in the front seat (check your vehicle manual for information on airbags), but it is safer for the child to be in the rear. The middle seat is safest if you have a three point belt, otherwise chose the left hand side so they're getting out on the pavement side. In any seat a child under 135cm must be in a carseat/booster. Presuming you are going with a high backed booster, it's good to get one that secures to the main seat with ISOFIX, that way you don't need to remember to strap it in when your child isn't in the car. We've used http://www.rearfacingtoddlers.com/ before, but I don't think they do high back boosters. It's worth giving her a call though for some professional advice.

You can lock down an iPhone to exclude apps and use of the internet. We have an old iPhone that's locked down to some child appropriate games and TV apps. On iOS12 these restrictions have moved under "Screen Time" in settings, on iOS11 I think they were under "Settings" -> "General" -> "Restrictions". I'd suggest setting up a new apple ID for your child, by creating a child ID this will link to your main apple ID. You'll then have to approve app installs via your phone which provides better control.

Surely being in a list of "cool" places in a Daily Mail article is the definition of uncool?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > someone told me that the EU had a hand in the > privatisation of Royal Mail- something about EU > competition rules and the state cannot subsidise > the 'industry' Except most of Europe has state owned postal and rail services. The Lexit arguments about state aid are so obviously untrue it is pathetic.

nunhead_man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > concerning the post that says > > "Paul Lupton Wrote: The sooner vehicles can use > the bridge again the better - Bellenden is overrun > with traffic " > > Say after me 100 times > > "Roads create traffic" > > e.g > https://bettertransport.org.uk/roads-nowhere/induc > ed-traffic But there is evidence that the closure shifted traffic to less suitable roads. If a closure of Bellenden (and associated side roads) was on the cards I might agree with you. But the choice was between closing the bridge with no mitigation for other roads or reopening the bridge - in that case the choice for residents in and around Bellenden was obvious.

I have a Fellowes 11C and it has been pretty reliable over the last few years. It'll take 10 pages at a time and go for a decent length of time before getting hot.

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Captain Marvel Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > A crossing there, ensuring the safety of > imaginary > > pedestrians will make it unimaginably worse. > > Put off by using that junction currently thanks to > the currently dangerous junction which isn't > suitable for crossing. I run there quite regularly and I see lots of other people trying to cross.

First I would post on James (the new councillor's) thread to see if he can nudge them to do their job. Also I would phone first thing tomorrow morning, ask to speak to a manager and say that you're about to call your insurers who will pursue the council for their costs. Having some potential cost liability might focus their mind. If it doesn't then call your insurers and let them fight with the council.

Yes, but if the argument is that traditional agents are better because they are incentivised to achieve better prices it's worth considering if that is actually true (I don't think it is). Purple Bricks seems to be mostly selling on price and price transparency. Personally I think both of these are good things. I'm also unconvinced by the "no-win no fee" model of many parts of the housing market (agents, conveyencers, etc); it tends to be an excuse to charge a premium to worried customers in exchange for (often illusory) flexibility.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Because they earn a bigger fee on a higher price > (of course...) And they dont earn anything if they > dont sell. To an extent, but they also get paid more for shifting more properties at a non optimal price than they do selling fewer at the absolute best price. If they add ?50k to the selling price, then their company gets an extra ?500-?1000 and they perhaps an extra ?50? If that takes them an extra 5 viewings to achieve then do you think they'll really bother? Or will they use that time to sell another property? > At the end of the day the seller can > walk away from a traditional agent at any time, > for free, the agent therefore has to evidence to > the seller that he/she is getting the highest > possible price. Maybe, maybe not. A seller is more likely to walk away if a property hasn't been offered on then if they have a bunch of offers at a lower price. > For me there are far too many people on the PB > reviews saying, "PB sold my house in 5 days....", > well sorry but thats generally insufficient time > to create sufficient interest in the property / > have a number of intereated parties / negotiate > with the buyer / and if more than one buyer have > some competitive tension etc. Isn't that about having a good book of customers that you can market to immediately? Isn't there also a perception that if a property has been on the market for a while then it's overpriced and more open to lower offers?

Just to clarify we have the ?19 inflatable from Amazon not the ?180 bed box. I think it's more than sufficient for a long flight.

James - Perhaps Southwark council could address the traffic issues on Adys Road and surrounding streets that they've spent time and money surveying at least three times over the last few years rather than launch a consultation about parking which isn't a high priority for most residents. The only reason there is parking pressure around here is because of the stupid double yellow lines that Southwark imposed on us without consultation and are proposing to make worse when they implement the quietway scheme. Speaking of which, shouldn't they finish that consultation and implement the residents' wishes there before starting on another overlapping consultation?

We do, it's not really a bed (at least not for our 4 year old) but it does provide them with leg support and helps them sleep. Given they're pretty cheap and very portable I think it's worth getting.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Was googling buying lira earlier ,until I realised > it would be Euros ! It's usually cheaper to just get cash out at a cash machine when you land. Make sure you don't select the "pay in ?" option as that's a massive (5-9%) rip off.

MarianaTrench Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bellenden has a very small catchment area by now > so you need to live pretty close to have a chance > at getting a reception place! Do you mean The Belham Primary (corner of Belenden Road and Maxted Road) which has a catchment of less than 400m? Bellenden Primary (corner of Nutbrook Street and Troy Town) offered places to all applicants for the 2017/18 academic year.

Have you tried https://www.met.police.uk/ro/report/ocr/how-to-report-a-crime/? You can just click through all the questions until you get to "report something else" and it then gives you a normal form to fill in and submit.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > East Dulwich Road and roads off of it have always > been dodgy. > > Crystal Palace Rd. Adys Rd. Gowlett Rd. All dodgy > after dark. and even during the day. > Too many cut throughs and places to disappear. That?s ridiculous, we?re on Adys and it?s absolutely fine. As is Crystal Palace Rd. Also with car parked both sides, plenty of street trees and regular traffic I?d have thought getting to pedestrins on these roads would be tough.

I am really worried about that bit of pavement during the evening rush hour, especially in winter when it's dark. It's far too narrow to take the volume of people exiting the station and turning right. Is the "layby section" for deliveries or will it be being used by busses? It seems like an accident waiting to happen.